3 ms·
I am sure our public servants were paid handsomely to take a look at it. (sorry hn, was that snarky?)
by eternalban 10y ago
I am sure our public servants were paid handsomely to take a look at it. (sorry hn, was that snarky?)
- icebraining 10y agoThe public servants didn't have a say yet. And last year they did block Comcast's merger with Time Warner, as well as AT&T's purchase of T-mobile in 2011.
- eternalban 10y agoFair enough. And more seriously, we must revisit this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunications_Act_of_1996 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunications_Act_of_1996
- jonwachob91 10y agoT-Mobil is an infrastructure company. Time Warner is a content company. You can't compare the regulators blocking an infrastructure company (AT&T) from purchasing another infrastructure company (T-Mobile) to a infrastructure company (AT&T) acquiring a content company (Time Warner).
- icebraining 10y agoI'm not saying they are comparable; I'm pointing out that regulators are willing to block mergers and purchases, unlike the implied claim that they'll rubber stamp anything as long as they've been paid off.
- jessedhillon 10y agoAs if the people who see bribes everywhere won't just claim them that the right people just weren't bribed, or that the competition's bribes were more convincing. Once bribery is assumed without evidence, it explains everything.
- vitus 10y agoHm. In investigating, I saw that Comcast's intended merger was with TWC, which makes a difference (as both are infrastructure companies).
- shmerl 10y agoThey approved NBC purchase by Comcast. A very bad decision, which AT&T will now use as a precedent to claim they aren't any worse.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]